Globovisión besieged by investigations, fines, violence

The recent
regulatory probe into coverage at Globovisión, the only TV broadcaster
critical of the Chávez administration, is the latest in a long string of
investigations and other harassment. The network is struggling to stay afloat. By Monica Campbell

Published August 29, 2012

CARACAS
In Venezuela, there is one television broadcaster critical of the
government that is still standing—but just barely. The private network,
Globovisión, is contending with regulatory fines, a steady stream of government
scorn, and even direct violence against its staff. It is being forced to defend
itself in court and still push out coverage during a critical election year.

Nobody
expects Globovisión to have an easy ride in a country where state-run media
dominate and the licenses of several independent broadcasters have been revoked
under the rule of President Hugo Chávez Frías. But the past year has brought
unprecedented challenges. In October 2011, following a deadly riot in June at
the El Rodeo Prison outside Caracas, Conatel, the national media regulator,
imposed a fine of 9.3 million bolívares (US$2.16 million) on Globovisión for
its coverage of the crisis.

Although
other national and international media covered the riots, interviewing
witnesses and worried relatives, regulators singled out Globovisión, claiming
it aired excessive footage of weeping relatives and spliced in the sound of
gunfire. The broadcaster, regulators concluded, promoted a climate of “hatred
and intolerance.” Globovisión countered that it had reported the story fully,
speaking to families of those involved and working within the limitations
placed on the press, which included keeping journalists cordoned off a half-mile
away from the prison.

The fine is
the latest addition to the government’s file on Globovisión. Chávez had
previously accused the station of backing a failed 2002 coup attempt against
him. In that case, Globovisión met with the same government scrutiny as other
private channels, including Radio Caracas Televisión, or
RCTV, whose broadcast license was pulled in 2007. In 2010, RCTV was withdrawn
from cable and satellite broadcasts after the station refused to air Chávez’s lengthy
and impromptu speeches.

Conatel also
investigated Globovisión in 2009, after the station reported on an earthquake
that struck Venezuela before officials had issued a public statement about it.
Regulators complained that the station relied on information from U.S.
seismological authorities instead of from Venezuelan officials, and that it
risked sparking public panic. Globovisión’s director said the country’s
authorities were slow to react to the quake and that reliable information was
found elsewhere.

In their
many administrative investigations into Globovisión, regulators have accused
the network of “inciting rebellion” and creating “panic and anxiety in the
population,” CPJ research shows. A sanction in any one case
could lead to the station's suspension for up to 72 hours; a second sanction
could result in the revocation of its broadcast license.

In 2010, Guillermo
Zuloaga, Globovisión’s president, fled the country to escape a series of
charges, including spreading false news and offending Chávez in public remarks,
and usury and conspiracy in connection with car dealerships he owns. Zuloaga
denied any wrongdoing and said the charges had been fabricated as a way to
close the station. He remains in exile in the U.S.

"We are
the last independent broadcaster standing, and the government is doing what it can
to shut us down," said María Fernanda Flores, Globovisión’s
vice-president, in an interview from the station’s headquarters in Caracas.

The
government maintains that Globovisión’s story is one of sensationalism and
manipulation. “It’s a public disservice,” said Julio Rafael Chávez Meléndez, a
representative of the National Assembly and vice chairman of its Commission on
Media and People’s Power. “Even still, they are allowed to air their stories,
which clearly fulfill the opposition’s political goal. But we also can’t just
let them run wild and trample over our laws without consequence. So while they
can defend their right to exist as a supposed news broadcaster, we must defend
our right to apply the law. This is not about silencing the opposition.”

Carlos
Ayala, a constitutional law expert in Caracas and the former president of the
Inter-American Commission on Human Rights (IACHR), disagrees. He said people
watching Globovisión may get the impression that the Venezuelan media are free
to criticize the government, but the station is paying a very high price for
airing its views. “We’re seeing how far the government can go—threatening the
very existence of a broadcaster by imposing huge fines.” The US$2.16 million
penalty for Globovisión’s prison coverage is equivalent to 7.5 percent of its
gross income for 2010.

Still, some
critics say the station exacerbates polarization of the press and is as guilty
of one-sided coverage as its pro-Chávez counterparts. While he is sympathetic
to Globovisión’s lone standing, Andrés Cañizalez, a professor and media expert
at Andrés Bello Catholic University in Caracas, says Globovisión spends “less
time on investigative journalism and more resources on pointing out the
government’s errors.”

Lysber Ramos
Sol, who heads Globovisión’s investigative reporting team, said objective,
journalistic probes are part of the station’s mission, but that hard-hitting
reports are “nearly impossible” to conduct given Venezuela’s lack of
transparency. Globovisión reporters also say that they are blacklisted. Very
often, they say, officials deny their requests for information and government
interviews. Entry to government press conferences is also routinely blocked.

“What’s
typical is to show up at a news conference and be stopped at the door for not being
on the ‘authorized’ reporters list,” said Sasha Ackerman, who joined
Globovisión’s reporting team three years ago. “So we wait outside with the rest
of the excluded reporters and get information from colleagues or in some other
roundabout way.”

Globovisión
reporters also face physical threats and intimidation. In March, a group of
unidentified armed men, wearing red, pro-Chávez United Socialist Party T-shirts,
attacked and stole footage from Ackerman and a Globovisión cameraman covering a
rally for opposition presidential candidate Henrique Capriles Radonski. At home
that evening, Ackerman’s husband asked whether reporting on this year’s
presidential elections would be safe. “I’ve thought hard about it,” said
Ackerman. “I’ve never faced direct violence for reporting. But it’s also made
me more determined to go and report.”

Meanwhile,
ski-masked members of the pro-government group “La Piedrita” (Little Rock),
gathered outside the Globovisión offices in March to hurl insults and wave
guns, the station reported. In previous years, the group claimed responsibility for tear gas attacks on journalists
and news outlets and threatened to “take up arms” against Globovisión—all while
accusing the station of promoting violence against Chávez.

In 2009, the
Inter-American Court of Human Rights ruled that Venezuela must provide
protection to the station and its reporters, but the government never implemented
the court’s recommendations. The Venezuelan government, along with that of
Ecuador, has proposed restrictions on the power of the court’s sister
organization, the IACHR, and in particular the special rapporteur for freedom
of expression, whose office has issued damning reports of both countries’
climate for press freedom.

How long
Globovisión will be tolerated is hard to predict. “RCTV’s ratings went up when
it was about to be closed,” said Carlos Correa, director of Espacio Público, a
nongovernmental organization that promotes free expression and journalism
ethics in Venezuela. “Picking on Globovisión could make it more popular.” Globovisión
said its advertising rates have remained steady.

In late
June, Venezuela’s Supreme Court ordered a freeze on Globovisión assets totaling
24.4 million bolívares (US$5.7 million).
The network’s lawyer, Ricardo Antela, told CPJ that the decision was
aimed at forcing Globovisión to pay the fine over its prison coverage. A few
days later, the network paid the US$2.16 million fine. A separate appeal to
have the fine annulled is pending in administrative court. If that ruling is
favorable, Globovisión will apply to have the fine reimbursed, Antela said. In
the meantime, the company was forced to take on debt, he said, and the
financial impact will be felt throughout the network.

Meanwhile,
Antela said the situation is such that government regulators could point to any
number of alleged Globovisión violations and shut it down within days.

Monica Campbell is a San Francisco-based freelance
journalist and former CPJ consultant.